Reflection-SeeingYourself in the Mirror of Consciousness-VII

When Spinoza in mid seventeenth century recorded his observations in his grand treatise ‘Ethics’, regarding knowledge and said that there exists an idea of an idea and to know is to know that one knows, he actually meant that there always exists knowledge of the knowledge. There exists the consciousness which says she knows your knowing, she has the knowledge of your knowledge too.

He declared human knowledge of three kinds- First kind based on knowledge of our sensory experience. It is knowledge of both state of our body as well as knowledge of external bodies. Knowledge of second kind is based on our reasoning and our understanding. We define the things based on that knowledge. We make concepts to move further on knowledge trail, e.g. concept and definition of God, of spirit, of world, etc.

In the third kind he tells us of a type of knowledge which is sort of ‘mental seeing’. It is sort of inner vision. This is not knowledge of finite things in a finite way. It means there exist a continuity of knowing about ourselves in each moment of our life, within our soul, with in our timeless existence.

It is the final knowledge of the knowledge in a way that knowledge of first two kinds does not escape from this knowing.

Recommended By Colombia

We place our knowing under our own process of knowing. It is entirely non-judgmental, moment to moment, devoid of concepts and reasoning. Once you start being judgmental you step down to the knowledge of lower category.

It is meta-cognition. (Cognition- means perceptual knowing). It is cognition of cognition. It is the knowing as a state not knowledge as an end. By knowledge we actually try to make an end statement, a conclusion. But knowing of knowledge is a process, with endless continuity. It is the process of knowing of your own cognitive process.

Kant says the same thing about apperception. Apperception is more about perception, while cognition tells more about knowing of the perception. Apperception is perception of our perceptions (May be your jnana indri). You do the perceptions to perceive the outer world; by apperception you perceive your own perceptions. Apperception is again a process. If you start building memory, there starts a process of building knowledge based on your perceptions. Rest is same as categorization of knowledge.

What if you don’t build memory? The process of apperception becomes endless continuity. You may go as far as reading your own thoughts, seeing your own inner self, visualizing consciousness at work!!

Kant differentiates apperception into two- One is empirical apperception- which is perception of states of body which again is moment to moment. It is of lower kind and attaches you to the body. You develop your tastes as per your a sharpness of empirical perception. Second is Transcendental Apperception. “This is pure, original, unchangeable consciousness which is the necessary condition of experience as such and the ultimate foundation of the synthetic unity of experience", says Kant.

This means you observe the self not as in its state of hilarity or sadness, excitement or frustration of hunger and thirst. If you are doing that you are doing empirical apperception. You do transcendental apperception when you are not affected by states of self. You start not perceiving selfhood even. You reduce yourself to a point, with all nothingness all around but one with all of synthetic unity of self with the universe.

That is what to say of reflection. Sartre also differentiates Pure and Impure reflection. In impure reflection, self contemplates upon its psychic states. Pure reflection is the presence of reflective consciousness to the consciousness reflected on. It is the immediate non cognitive consciousness of the self.

The very nature of consciousness is such that to be and to know its being is one and the same thing. If any one asks me, what I was doing just a moment ago? To answer this I do not have to go to my memory. I immediately can answer that. That is my immediate non cognitive relation with my self. Why non-cognitive because it is not deliberate. While I was busy with the outer I was not thinking of myself.

By the way memory is not consciousness. Memory means positing your question to the past activity, to the stored activity of consciousness. Consciousness does not run backward. It is continuous forward process. Her going towards memory stores is branching of its forward activity.

During an action if you are injured you do not feel pain till the action is over. You feel pain only when you reflect over the body.

To be reflectively consciousness does not mean to be self conscious. Phenomenon of self consciousness does not lead you to any spiritual experience. A child becomes self conscious when a group of friends ask him to recite his latest learned nursery poem. He looses confidence and looses more than half of his performance. We become self conscious while on stage or while alone when we see ourselves sad or hilarious, when someone hurts you or admires you. Even we may not be both. During meditation if we are just contemplating over our thoughts activity, seeing only the state of self being affected by thoughts we are into state of impure reflection only. For pure reflection to happen, Idea is to become reflectively conscious!

But this pure reflection does not happen easily. It requires a catharsis effected by consciousness on itself. So what is this catharsis?

(PS: I often refer to consciousness as she, her etc. and not as it this. This is out of love towards this wonderful phenomenon of nature!)